JUDGMENT Mr. Rajiv Narain Raina, J.:- This order will dispose of the aforesaid four writ petitions as common question of law and facts have been raised in these petitions. 2. Brief facts of the case are that in terms of orders dated 27.08.2013 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.346 of 2013 and other connected petitions, the respondent-Board invited online applications in continuation of advertisement No.2/2012 from such candidates as had passed the Haryana Teachers Eligibility Test (HTET) held in June, 2013 and possessed all other eligibility conditions on the cut off date i.e. 8th December, 2012. The respondent- Board issued notice dated 15th November, 2013 inviting online applications for the same recruitment process from 19th November, 2013 to 29th November, 2013. It was clearly stipulated in the notice that after the date of publication of the notice no offline application form or copy of downloaded application form will be accepted by that office. 3. The instant petition is based on a news-item dated 22.11.2013 (Annexure P-6) published in a vernacular newspaper‘Dainik Bhaskar’stating “that the Haryana School Teachers Selection Board has initiated process to fill up 9870 posts of primary teachers. For this, applications forms may be deposited on-line till 8th December and fee may be deposited till 12th December upto 4 P.M”. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that because of this news item the petitioners did not apply online before 29th November, 2013 i.e. the last date mentioned in the notice, on the presumption that date for submission of application forms has been extended to 8th December, 2013. However, in its publication dated 3rd December, 2013‘Dainik Bhaskar regretted by publication that the Secretary of the Board Mr. Dharamvir has clarified that Haryana Teachers Selection Board has initiated process to fill up posts of primary teachers, the last date of submission of application forms was 29.11.2013. There is no proposal to extend that date at present. Inadvertently, in publication of 22nd November ‘Dainik Bhaskar’ under title ‘Application forms for 9870 posts of primary teachers till 8th’last date for submission of application forms was mentioned as 8th December. Error is regretted.”Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that there is a bona fide assurance given to the petitioners on account of this wrong news and therefore their applications sent online belatedly deserve to be accepted. Error is regretted.”Learned counsel for the petitioners argues that there is a bona fide assurance given to the petitioners on account of this wrong news and therefore their applications sent online belatedly deserve to be accepted. Thus the petitioners are not at fault for failure to submit their application forms on the cut off date. Learned counsel prays that a direction be issued to the Board to accept the application forms of the petitioners now. 5. I am afraid this argument of the learned counsel cannot be accepted. It is well settled that a writ petition cannot be entertained on the basis of a news-item of which no public notice can be taken. In the absence of any notice issued by the Board in any newspaper or uploaded on its website the writ petition cannot be entertained. Learned counsel for the petitioners only refers to a newspaper report which has no legal value except as a fact and proof of publication. It would be too much to attribute authenticity or credibility to any information or fact merely because it found published in a private newspaper or journal or magazine or any other form of communication from outside the portals of the Board, and to treat it as the gospel truth. It needs no reiteration that newspaper reports per se do not constitute legally acceptable evidence unless owned up by the authorities concerned like the Board in the present case. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners concedes that neither any ‘public notice’ by the Board extending date for submission of online application forms has ever been published, nor any such information was uploaded on Board’s website or put up on its notice board. Further, in its notice dated 15th November, 2013 (P-5), the Board had given clear instructions in Notes 1 to 6. Notes 4 & 6 which are relevant are reproduced as under:- “4. Detailed instructions for filling the online application form are available on the website www.recruitment.cdacomohali.in and advertisement no.2/2012 dated 8.11.2012, special instructions, Appendix ‘A’ and above notice is also available at HSTSB and CDAC Mohali website i.e. www.hstsb.gov.in and www.recruitment.cdamohali.in respectively. 6. Notes 4 & 6 which are relevant are reproduced as under:- “4. Detailed instructions for filling the online application form are available on the website www.recruitment.cdacomohali.in and advertisement no.2/2012 dated 8.11.2012, special instructions, Appendix ‘A’ and above notice is also available at HSTSB and CDAC Mohali website i.e. www.hstsb.gov.in and www.recruitment.cdamohali.in respectively. 6. In case of any guidance/information/clarification regarding the online filing of application the candidate may call at CDAC Mohali helpline No.0172-6619054 and 0172-6619055 on all working days from 10.00 A.M. to 5 P.M. Attention: Applicants are advised to check HSTSB and CDAC Mohali website regularly for information of verification/scrutiny of documents-cum-interview schedule.” 7. The petitioners were aware of the above instructions but failed to verify the date from Board’s website or even they did not think it cautious to call at any phone number to confirm the cut off date or whether the newspaper was authentic in its reporting which publication was later regretted. Before parting, it is held that the petitioners would be at liberty to bring actions against the newspaper for its false news which mislead them and delayed their applications. It is unfortunate that in our free country protected by free speech media feels free to do what it likes, when it likes or why it likes to make and destroy people and misguide them by lies, falsehood, paid news and other deceitful practices and the sheer hyperbole of its power flowing from the fundamental right to hold a pen with no sufficiently perfect eraser to undo its misdeeds, leaks and messages. Neither prescribed qualification too to write, nor any conduct control mechanism of journalist behaviour expected from them. It is not enough to say sorry and regret what was wrongly done so lightly in a publication owned by the perpetrator of falsehood in its delivery of content. If the medium is the message according to Marshall McLuhan in ‘Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man’ published in 1964, then so is his pun on the word ‘message’and changing it to read‘mass age’, ‘mess age’and ‘massage’in his later book ‘The Medium is the Massage’. The petitioners have been massaged by the print media but not messaged by the Haryana School Teachers Selection Board. 8. In view of the above, no case for interference is made out to enforce a false start in the race of appointment to service. Consequently, the writ petitions are dismissed in limini. The petitioners have been massaged by the print media but not messaged by the Haryana School Teachers Selection Board. 8. In view of the above, no case for interference is made out to enforce a false start in the race of appointment to service. Consequently, the writ petitions are dismissed in limini. ------------------